SGS Product & Process Certification - Marine Stewardship Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Scoring criteria Scoring guidepost 60 Scoring guidepost 80 Scoring guidepost 100 1.2.2 Harvest control rules and tools: There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place Scoring comments (1-60) Generally understood harvest control rules are in place that are consistent with the harvest strategy and which act to reduce the exploitation rate as limit reference points are approached. (2-60) There is some evidence that tools used to implement harvest control rules are appropriate and effective in controlling exploitation. (1-80) Well defined harvest control rules are in place that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. (2-80) The selection of the harvest control rules takes into account the main uncertainties. (3-80) Available evidence indicates that the tools in use are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules (1-100) Well defined harvest control rules are in place that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. (2-100) The design of the harvest control rules take into account a wide range of uncertainties. (3-100) Evidence clearly shows that the tools in use are effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules. The harvest strategy developed for the UK sea bass fishery and adopted by the EC is designed to modify exploitation patterns so that exploitation rates are sustainable. It has achieved this by using well defined and understood tools in the form of a minimum legal landing size, gill-mesh size controls, and (in the UK) nursery area closures to protect juvenile bass. Both the harvest strategy and the harvest control rules and tools have been selected and designed to take account of the main uncertainties in this fishery, which are recruitment variability and the inshore small-boat nature of the much of the fishery. A lesser uncertainty is the outcome in response to management in terms of exploitation levels, which are not controlled directly. The available evidence indicates that the package of measures introduced by the UK in 1990 has been effective in achieving appropriate exploitation patterns and levels as required by the harvest strategy, except in the case of trawl fisheries where gear selectivity is not well matched to the MLS of the target species and effort directed at bass is uncontrolled. There are no explicit decision rules for the sea bass fishery in the North Sea. As stated under 1.2.1, technical harvest control measures are in place and could be extended when considered necessary. Page 65 of 151
This is regarded as an implicit harvest control rule. The assessment team has not penalised the fishery for the absence of clearly defined reference points under this Performance Indicator, since the harvest strategy clearly uses an appropriate proxy for reference points. All of the SGP 60 requirements and the second and third SG80 requirements are met, but the HCRs that are in place do not ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached (with respect to MSY, since recruitment is not stock-driven). A score of 75 is therefore awarded. Condition: the client will be asked to liaise with management and research bodies and to determine what part they can play in the development of an appropriate harvest control rule. Score: 75 Audit trace references Page 66 of 151
Page 1 and 2:
Public comment draft report Marine
Page 3 and 4:
Glossary of acronyms and terms used
Page 5 and 6:
9.2.3 PSA .........................
Page 7 and 8:
Condition 1: P1, 1.2.2 Harvest cont
Page 9 and 10:
Current members of VBHL are the fol
Page 11 and 12:
1.4 References Castilho, R., and Mc
Page 13 and 14:
Pawson, M.G., G. D. Pickett and P.
Page 15 and 16: Figure 2.Main migration routes of a
Page 17 and 18: This hypothesis was tested in 2000
Page 19 and 20: also comprised a substantial part o
Page 21 and 22: 3.1 Analytical assessments The firs
Page 23 and 24: Figure 3.Indices of the abundance o
Page 25 and 26: short-term forecasts and setting TA
Page 27 and 28: The landings of cod by the UoC are
Page 29 and 30: monitoring, landing recording, etc.
Page 31 and 32: and use only of rod-and-line, with
Page 33 and 34: 7. STANDARD USED The MSC Principles
Page 35 and 36: a) setting catch levels that will m
Page 37 and 38: 8.2 Public consultation Public anno
Page 39 and 40: certified as sustainable on 3 rd De
Page 41 and 42: 9.2.2 SICA A SICA proceeds in sever
Page 43 and 44: Table 4.SICA tables from the MSC Fi
Page 45 and 46: Table 6. PSA Productivity attribute
Page 47 and 48: Table 9. FAM Workbook Table with sc
Page 49 and 50: 10.1 Performance 10. ASSESSMENT RES
Page 51 and 52: controls) that seek to maximise Y/R
Page 53 and 54: management system responded to find
Page 55 and 56: Recommendation 4 - Governance and p
Page 57 and 58: 13.1 Logo use 13. MSC LOGO LICENSIN
Page 59 and 60: APPENDICES APPENDIX A: SCORING TABL
Page 61 and 62: Scoring criteria Scoring guidepost
Page 65: metrics are more appropriate to a s
Page 69 and 70: emovals are apparent in the range o
Page 71 and 72: Audit trace references Insert refs
Page 77 and 78: FAMv2 7.1.10 states ―If it can be
Page 79 and 80: statement of intent about continuin
Page 81 and 82: Expert knowledge and the informatio
Page 83 and 84: Rare fish like skates or sturgeons
Page 85 and 86: Score: 80 Audit trace references Sc
Page 87 and 88: 2.4 Habitat Scoring criteria Scorin
Page 91 and 92: 2.5 Ecosystem Scoring criteria Scor
Page 93 and 94: irreversible harm to ecosystem stru
Page 95 and 96: Page 94 of 151
Page 97 and 98: livelihood; and - Incorporates an a
Page 107 and 108: (2-60) Sanctions to deal with non-c
Page 113 and 114: APPENDIX B: PEER REVIEW REPORTS Pee
Page 115 and 116: Performance Indicator Review Please
Page 117 and 118:
Performanc e Indicator Has all the
Page 119 and 120:
Performanc e Indicator Has all the
Page 121 and 122:
Page 120 of 151
Page 123 and 124:
ass. If the scores I have questione
Page 125 and 126:
3. Target Stock Status and Harvest
Page 127 and 128:
4.2 Discarding. Quote ―The client
Page 129 and 130:
8.4 Other certification evaluations
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix A: Scoring Table. (Comment
Page 133 and 134:
2.3.2. Management Strategy. Quote
Page 135 and 136:
Performance Indicator Has all the r
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Performance Indicator 1.1.1 2.1.1 2
Page 147 and 148:
C4 P3 Fishery Specific Manage ment
Page 149 and 150:
1.2.3 Sportvisserij Nederland stron
Page 151:
APPENDIX E: OBJECTION TO DETERMINAT
show all

SGS Product & Process Certification - Marine Stewardship Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?